Appeal 2007-2848
Application 10/765,106
disregard claim limitations comprised of printed matter.” In re Lowry, 32
F.3d 1579, 1582, 32 USPQ2d 1031, 1034 (Fed. Cir. 1994) (citations
omitted). In determining whether the printed matter imparts patentability to
a claimed invention, however, “the critical question is whether there exists
any new and unobvious functional relationship between the printed matter
and the substrate.” In re Gulack, 703 F.2d 1381, 1386, 217 USPQ 401, 404
(Fed. Cir. 1983).
Essentially, Appellant's alignment indicia at the butt end of the golf
club is printed matter that has a functional relationship with the golf club, as
it acts as a method to sight the ball to the target. However, we conclude the
Examiner has provided sufficient evidence in the prior art to support a prima
facie case of obviousness of a putter, as claimed, having alignment indicia
on the butt end of a golf club.
Appellant contends that "all of these rejections are improper as
Radakovich, when combined with Takeuchi, fails to meet all of the claimed
limitations." (Br 8.) Appellant also argues that "[i]n addition to not
disclosing the claimed invention, Radakovich and Takeuchi are focused
upon different concepts relating to golf clubs, and in the Appellant's opinion
are, therefore, not obvious to combine." (Id.) Appellant argues the
alignment system of Radakovich is for sighting a club relative to a target and
not for aligning a club relative to the ball. (Br. 9.)
We, therefore, focus our discussion primarily on whether Radakovich
and Takeuchi teach the claimed aligning and sighting features of a putter
type golf club. Appellant argues "Radakovich at best teaches a sighting
device with meeting lines 92 and 94 (Fig. 4), but they do not intersect to
form four angles as claimed." (Br. 9.) Appellant further contends that
11
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013